If bush attacked Iran, saying it is to protect troops in Iraq, would Congress finally impeach? /nt

[still_one]

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. No

they will stand up, go to attention, salute, then go down and kiss their ass goodbye

This congress will not impeach even if our collective life depends on it

It makes you wonder what they have on them

[still_one]

4. It would make me wonder what the Democrats stand for? /nt

[Richard Steele]

2. No. This Congress isn't ever going to impeach for any reason. It's off the table. nm

[Kool Kitty]

3. You're kidding, right?

[eagler]

5. This war is as much a democratic war as a republican war and

will continue to be more so

[still_one]

6. It is more and more beginning to look like that, and that is a dangerous game

for them to play.

[barb162]

7. If you were given proof positive Iran was supplying weapons

against our troops, would you say he should be impeached? I agree with the other poster here as impeachment is off the table. This Congress is split in such a way that it gets just about nothing done.

[still_one]

11. We were given positive proof that Iraq had WMDs, weren't we?

Do you really trust what comes out of the bush administration?

Incidently, a poll coming out tomorrow by the Washington Post, a majority of people are saying do not fund this war

[barb162]

14. (1) No we weren't and (2) no on most items.

I will be interested in seeing the poll.

[still_one]

16. I will try to find a link and post it. I just heard it on KGO in S.F

peace

[still_one]

18. Here is an excerpt and link

Most in Poll Want War Funding Cut
Bush's Approval Rating Ties All-Time Low

By Jon Cohen and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 2, 2007; Page A01

Most Americans oppose fully funding President Bush's $190 billion request for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a sizable majority support an expansion of a children's health insurance bill he has promised to veto, putting Bush and many congressional Republicans on the wrong side of public opinion on upcoming foreign and domestic policy battles.

The new Washington Post-ABC News poll also shows deep dissatisfaction with the president and with Congress. Bush's approval rating stands at 33 percent, equal to his career low in Post-ABC polls. And just 29 percent approve of the job Congress is doing, its lowest approval rating in this poll since November 1995, when Republicans controlled both the House and Senate. It also represents a 14-point drop since Democrats took control in January.



Part of the displeasure with Congress stems from the stalemate between Democrats and the White House over Iraq policy. Most Americans do not believe Congress has gone far enough in opposing the war, with liberal Democrats especially critical of their party's failure to force the president into a significant change in policy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/01/AR2007100101235.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=new

[barb162]

21. See this?

"At the same time, there is no consensus about the pace of any U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq. In July, nearly six in 10 said they wanted to decrease the number of troops there, but now a slim majority, 52 percent, think Bush's plan for removing some troops by next summer is either the right pace for withdrawal (38 percent) or too hasty (12 percent would like a slower reduction, and 2 percent want no force reduction). Fewer people (43 percent) want a quicker exit."

[still_one]

22. Then in 5 years when we are still there, lets see them justify the deaths

The idiots who authorized this invasion, destabilized the whole region. They effectively gave the Shia majority, ruling control of Iraq.

This IS an endless war. The baker/hamilton study said we should be engaging ALL PARTIES in the region in a dialog. NONE OF THAT IS BEING DONE.

I would also like to point out AGAIN, that WE INVADED A COUNTRY THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. What gave us that right. It wasn't the U.N. In fact we were suppossed to go back for a second vote which we NEVER DID. Congress overuled the War Powers Act with the IWR.

60% of the Iranians our not happy with their government. Please note the parlimentary election that occurred in Iran where ahmedinajad lost in the parliment

If we should be so STUPID and bomb or invade Iran, not only will it unite the people of Iran stand behind their leader, who they can't stand, but also unite most of the region against us and our allies. A very bad move. In addition, you think oil is expensive now just wait.

Think of it this way, when 9/11 occurred for the most part the U.S. population was united behind bush, the same thing would occur in Iran.

The answer to Iraq, is get OUT NOW

[Lasher]

13. I wouldn't believe this administration if they told me the sky is blue.

So what if Iran is supplying weapons that are used against our troops? So are we.

[still_one]

15. but, but, Iraq was involved with 9/11, no I mean Iran, no wait, they came from Saudi Arabia

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[barb162]

17. If I see the sky is blue and they say so too, fine.

I have no use for anyone supplying weapons against US troops. Do you?
What it is you mean by that third sentence, I have no idea.

[still_one]

19. The question is what are we doing in Iraq really?

Before we invaded, Saddam offered to step down, if given safe passage to another country, and money. The bush administration said no, and invaded Iraq.

After saddam was overthrown, the U.N. offered to take over. The bush administration said no, and here we are today in the middle of a civil war that only the Iraqis can solve

[barb162]

20. I think right now we are trying to get the Iraqis not to kill each other.

And not kill US troops. In other words, not have a mass bloodbath where millions are killing each others. It can get much, much worse unfortunately.

The secon sentence...I don't recall that.

[still_one]

24. We have NO BUSINESS THERE. Oil is the only reason. mass bloodbath is B.S

We caused and are causuing this killing. We are the catalyst. bloodbath, over a 100000 Iraqis have been killed because of us. How more of a bloodbath do you want.

but more important than that, poll after poll indicate that the majority of people in Iraq want us out. IT ISN'T OUR COUNTRY

If you are so concerned about the "millions" killing each other, perhaps you or your family should enlist.

Actually, it is a far better deal to join a U.S. backed mercenery group where you will get 7000 to 8000 a month. An enlisted soldier can't even come close to that

[Lasher]

26. I will clarify:

We ourselves have been providing weapons to the insurgency.

Vance said his only crime was telling the FBI that his employer, Shield Group Security, a now-defunct military contractor in Iraq, was selling weapons to terrorists, bribing Iraqi officials and trading weapons and ammunition to U.S. soldiers in exchange for liquor.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0907/092107rb1.htm

An investigation by the U.S. Government Accountability Office identified a new culprit who has been shipping into Iraq massive numbers of weapons that U.S. officials now fear are being used to kill American troops. It is our Pentagon.

The Defense Department has no clue about what happened to at least 190,000 guns - 110,000 AK47s and 80,000 pistols - that it gave Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, according to a GAO report released Monday. And U.S. officials now concede that at least some of the missing weapons are now being used to kill American troops.

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070808/EDIT/708080307/1003

You might say that this is to be excused because it was not intentional, or was the work of renegades. But we don't stop to wonder if there could be some similar reason we should be as forgiving toward Iran.

More to the point, why the focus only on Iran? The Saudis have been giving millions of dollars to Suni insurgents in Iraq.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-12-08-saudis-sunnis_x.htm

And wouldn't you like to know where the Iraq insurgency's foreign fighters are coming from? They are not coming from Iran.


http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

But you don't see President Cheney chomping at the bit to invade Saudi Arabia or Algeria in order to protect American troops in Iraq, do you?

This is the same bullshit we saw in the runup to the invasion of Iraq. Saddam was an evil tyrant, but there were and still are lots of evil tyrants in the world. Why did we single out Iraq, and why did we have to attack them right then? Iran is next on Cheney's shopping list of 7 nations he wants to invade and they are making excuses to start a war with them. That is my point.

[still_one]

27. I would also like to add that during the 80's we helped Iraq kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians

during that war with them by supplying gas and chemical weapons among other things

It should also be pointed out that the U.S. overthrew the DEMOCRATICALLY elected government of Iran, and replaced it with the shah

Remember Iran/Contra?

Haven't we done enough damage?

It is time to STOP the killing, and do what the baker/hamilton commission said, engage all parties in a dialog

Oh, incidently, the latest poll in Iraq indicated they want us out of their country

[Lasher]

28. Poppy continued to send aid to Saddam

Right up to the very day Iraq's tanks rolled into Kuwait.

[Ghost in the Machine]

8. Tea burns coming out of my nose. Thanks for the laugh!

:hi:

[wundermaus]

9. There's money to be made...

And our government is doing an excellent job of acting in the best interests of their constituents - the corporations. The fascists must be slapping each other on the backs and have a rollicking good laugh on us! Congress isn't kissing it's ass good bye... that's a reflection.

...by the way, brother, can you spare me a dime?

[Golden Raisin]

10. No. Not only would they not impeach

but a large number (both parties) would rally around Bush and say they (and we) had to support the President when the country was in peril and at war. If Bush had armed Blackwater mercenaries start arresting members of Congress and hauling them off to domestic Halliburton detention centers they still wouldn't impeach him.

[whoneedstickets]

12. No but the international criminal court might take notice....

I would love to see Bush languishing in Slobodan Milosevic's old cell.

[emilyg]

23. No.

[Disturbed]

25. The International Court of the UN or any other such Org. means

Zero to the Busholini Regime. The drums of another War are getting louder.